The proposed project involves a comparison of two approaches to the administration of the Structured Interview (SI)--the major instrument for the assessment of type-A, or coronary prone behavior. Roseman and his colleagues emphasize the importance of challenging and confrontational interviewer strategies for the elicitation of the type-A behavior pattern. On the other hand, Friedman and his colleagues are using the SI with only a minimum of such stress-inducing strategies. The proposed study attempts to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a difference in the extent to which the two interviewing techniques elicits type-A or coronary prone behavior? (2) What is the relation between the distribution of behavior types elicited by the two interview procedures? (3) Which of the two behavior type ratings is better able to predict severity of atherosclerosis?